ANDY Murray will once again lean on Ivan Lendl after joining his coach as a loser of five of his first six grand slam finals.

Murray was remaining upbeat after falling 6-7 (2-7) 7-6 (7-3) 6-3 6-2 to world No 1 Novak Djokovic in Sunday night's Australian Open final at Melbourne Park.

Hindered by blisters and a hamstring strain - undoubtedly scar tissue from his torrid four-hour, five-set semi-final win over Roger Federer 48 hours earlier - the US Open champion was unable to match Djokovic's remarkable staying powers after the first two sapping sets.

But unlike his two previous Open final losses - to Federer in 2010 and Djokovic in 2011 - Murray was anything but demoralised.

"There's going to be some obvious reasons for me feeling a little bit better," he said.

"The last few months have been the best tennis of my life. I made the Wimbledon final, won the Olympics, won the US Open.

"I was close here as well. It was close. So I know no one's ever won a slam, the immediate one after winning their first one. It's not the easiest thing to do and I got extremely close.

"So I have to try and look at the positives of the last few months, and I think I'm going in the right direction.

"This is the first time I've beaten Roger in a slam over five sets. I think I dealt with the situations and the ebbs and flows in that match well.

"I felt much more comfortable on the court today (against Djokovic) than even I did at the US Open, so that has to be a positive."

Just like Lendl, Murray broke through to win his maiden major after four finals defeats and then lost his next.

If the trend continues, Murray will lose his seventh grand slam final as well.

Lendl ultimately wound up with eight career majors, including two Australian Open titles, and will no doubt know how his charge is feeling.

Murray, though, said it was too soon to dissect his latest big-stage loss. "He said, 'Bad luck'. That's it," Murray said."There's no point going into huge detail about the match two minutes afterwards.

"We'll go away and spend a bit of time apart. When I go to start training over in the States, we'll discuss not just this match but the start to the year and the things I need to improve on if I want to keep getting better."

"In the second set was really a fight, a physical fight, which actually out of the blue Djokovic won the tiebreak. And from that moment Djokovic really only himself, so he got the upper hand."

Murray seemed physically to sit through. He had to be treated at the blisters on his feet."Djokovic obviously had that extra day of rest, where Murray Friday a five-setter against Roger Federer. This is fatal to the Briton. His feet were broken, he suffered his buttocks and his hamstring. That semifinal is physically so heavy been for him, mentally. I found him in the beginning of the finale already tired. "

"And that's not fair. The semi-finals on the same day must be played to no benefit for the finals. The Australian Open is known as the Grand Slam tournament that does everything for the tennis players, the Happy Slam, but this should really change. "

What is your tournament even more noticed in a negative way?"The fireworks on Australian Day. They must before or after a party do not during. Last year the semi-finals of Federer and Nadal through interrupted, now it was the woman final between Na Li and Victoria Azarenka. The Chinese became really through out her concentration. "

"And, but I find some time, we must abandon the term unforced error. I read during the men's final on Twitter that the level bit disappointing, because too many unforced errors were made. But in the modern physical tennis you do not speak of it, they are forced errors, which should be the term. "

"It's become so difficult to make a point without the opponent the ball just went with his racket touches. So high is the level. You saw that in the first two sets of men's finals also. Djokovic and Murray are not shot makers like Federer. But it was a huge physical and mental battle, often after long rallies points were made. They forced the other to an error. A forced error so. "

Saturday told you that 2013 will be the year of Murray and Djokovic. Why?"This is the second Grand Slam final in a row between them. Slowly, the bigger rivalry. What was formerly Federer v Nadal, Djokovic is against Murray."

"Murray and Djokovic are only 25 in age but they care a week. They can even seven years, where Federer still getting older. He will play fewer tournaments, more to his body thinking."

"And Nadal will soon be back on gravel probably are. But the question is whether it sits, on all surfaces, level comes after his knee injury."

See you behind Djokovic and Murray have someone in the near future they may come?"Not really. Actually, the level difference between the Big Four and the rest only increase. They push each level. They train incredibly hard, all anyone can do that. But Murray, Djokovic, Nadal and Federer have such good teams, with coaches, physiotherapists and people who watch their diet. "

"That's much more professional than the rest. And they can also afford because they earn much more than the rest. In this regard, we see so few surprises for the men in the coming year."

In the women do?"Yes, I think it's a very fun and exciting year for women. We saw this tournament a new name in the semifinals, Sloane Stephens. Positive as teenager showed up."

"There was a bit of a strange tournament for women. Serena Williams actually had to win, but was injured. Then there were the tripping of Na Li in the final. And there was the medical timeout Azarenka in the semi- finals. That was the low point of the Australian Open. "

In Dutch (radio) comments journalists (after the SF) also mentioned the new Andy, the 2.0 version of Andy (with Lendl). Mentally stronger, better FH, service etc. Can not post a link here (nobody would understand ) but I found an similar article with the 2.0 version here).

You are unfortunately SO right.The amount of idiotic spelling and grammar mistakes in so many articles is incredibly annoying-not to mention facts that are clearly wrong!Now,I'm not saying I'm perfect-I'm not,and I'd never claim to be.But I'm 20,and not paid to be a journalist.If you're going to be a writer,at least get the basics right!

And on that note,did anyone see the amount of articles about Kim and Jelena's "war" that sprung up once Andy qualified to play Nole?Going on about how the two were competing to look the best,be the most stylish,that it would be a face-off of the girlfriends as well as the boyfriends,etc. First of all,I thought it was more than a little insulting to both of the girls,as I'm pretty sure neither of them are the least bit concerned with being "at war to look the best" with the other.And secondly,it was just plain stupid-Jelena didn't even attend the tournament!

When I saw one of the articles I thought it was just the UK tabloid nonsense that you often get.Then I saw several more articles along the same lines!So stupid.